The Myth of the Hindu Rashtra.

The Bhoomi-Pujan of the Ram Mandir on August 5, built on the site of the Babri Masjid, which was illegally demolished in 1992, has rekindled fears of the BJP’s relentless pursuit of an India in which Hindus have more rights than people of other religion, that is, a Hindu Rashtra. It was this desire of a Hindu Rashtra that drove RSS to ally itself with the British before Independence, and it is the same desire which is promoting intolerance and majoritarianism in post-independence India. BJP and RSS leaders, party workers and supporters have relentlessly backed this vision that was propagated by Savarkar and M.S. Golwalkar. This dangerous vision is still being propagated today, without any thought being given to its implications and what it might mean for India, a country formed on democratic principles. The implications of declaring India a Hindu Rashtra will convince any Indian in their right mind to speak up against this majoritarian strategy which will reduce India to nothing but a dystopia for not only minorities, but almost every Indian. Not only is this unviable, but an insult to our ancestors, who fought bravely against the British for their idea of a democratic and inclusive India.

This article seeks to analyze the whether India could be declared as a nation solely for Hindus, and if yes, then what implications would it face.

1. A modern nation-state being defined by a single religious group or ethnicity is not only problematic, but also seems fairly impossible. A nation in modern times is a material and civic institution, which can never be religiously homogenous in practice.
2. The propagators of the ‘Hindu Rashtra’ often fail to address the fact that the term ‘Hindu’ itself has a foreign origin, and the emergence of Hinduism as a well-formed religion was seen only in the earlier part of the 19th Century.
3. Declaration of India as a ‘Hindu Rashtra’ implies that it is a theocracy, instead of a democracy, a principle enshrined not only in the constitution, but also in the spirit of India. The very notion of making India a theocracy that differentiates amongst citizens on the basis of religion is nothing short of blasphemous.
4. According to the 2011 Census, more than 19.3% of the population do not consider themselves to be the followers of Hinduism. This equates to 26 Crore Indians who would either have to live as second-class citizens, since such a sizeable population cannot be pushed out of the country.
5. Recognizing India as a nation of Hindus implies that the minorities living in India do not enjoy the same rights as Hindus, while Hindus from any nation or region are entitled to full citizen’s rights in India.
6. Christians and Muslims constitute most of India’s minority population. Declaring India as a Hindu Rashtra would ensure that the Indian Government would face stringent sanctions and sharp criticism from a lot of Arab and Western countries. This would drastically affect the 8.5 million Indian workers in the Gulf, who would probably be hit with Visa restrictions. Indian exports to the Gulf amount to more than $41.55 billion, which make up a sizeable portion of the Indian Economy. If this trade is affected, Indian economy would suffer a huge blow.

As clearly seen, declaring India as a Hindu Rashtra does not only alienate millions of Indians from their homeland, but also alienates India from its very foundations. Furthermore, it is entirely illogical, looking at the economic and diplomatic implications of such a preposterous vision. In today’s world, a nation cannot survive on its own, without support from abroad, and no nation would support a country that is based on religious discrimination and apartheid.

The RSS and the BJP have already managed to convince a vast majority of India into believing the inconceivable idea of India as a theocratic state meant only for Hindus, entirely on the basis of their victimization, even though they constitute more than 80% of India’s population. Indeed, a nation based on the subordination of minorities and making the political and social atmosphere religiously uniform is not only a ploy for political gain, but also theoretically and practically unfeasible.